From: Christopher Arthur (cjarthur@WAITROSE.COM)
Date: Thu Jan 22 2004 - 08:22:21 EST
A postscript, having briefly scanned the Kosok paper again I see he derives Godel's theorem within his dialectic but does not regard it as some sort of paradox or limit but inherent to the essentially open-ended process of meta-reflection. Chris >Hi Andy. I agree. Dialectic is a logic of content e.g. categories. This >does not mean that the moves typically made cannot be formalised. This has >been done by Kosok in the paper reprinted in *Hegel* ed. A Macintyre. >However it will not 'run' on a computer because to insert a real content >into the symbols leaves the 'solution' undetermined. As Hegel says >somewhere the transition involves 'an upward spring of the mind'. >Chris A >>Hi >> >>> I'll claim that any theory of a dialectical logic worth >>> > its salt should be able to be formalized and implemented on a >>> > computer. >> >>Sorry not to have looked in more detail at this interesting thread but >>the above remark caught my eye. >> >>I would have thought that dialectical logic is precisely a sublation of >>formal logic which means that it can never be 'formalised': it cannot >>be captured in a formal system. The failure of logicism, the >>reduction of maths to logic, (a failure I take Godel to have proved) >>can be viewed in this light. But Ian is the expert re Godel and all >>that...Ian I am forever interested to hear more of your view on this >>stuff. >> >>Andy > > >17 Bristol Road, Brighton, BN2 1AP, England 17 Bristol Road, Brighton, BN2 1AP, England
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 23 2004 - 00:00:01 EST